Expansions for Scotland's rail network proposed

[NotATrainspott]

Actually worth reading the report in full:
http://www.nestrans.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/FPASTS-1plus-Ellon-Rail-Study_Final-Report.pdf

3 options:
Option 1 - hourly service to Ellon, single track, single platform station at Newmachar
Option 2 - half hourly service to Ellon, single track, dynamic loop and two platform station at Newmachar
Option 3 - half hourly service to P&R east of Ellon, single track, dynamic loop and two platform station at Newmachar, double track from Ellon to P&R.

Options 2&3 also require redoubling and track lowering through the Schoolhill and Hutcheon Street tunnels north of Aberdeen.

Construction costs are shown broadly as £120m, £140m and £170m.

The £381M is taking the Most expensive Option 3 with full Schedule 4, Network rail costs, Track lowering in Aberdeen, Design costs and a 66% Green Book optimism bias.

Even at lower costs though it looks like the BCR is going to be very poor. The three options there generate BCRs in the 0.2-0.3 range so even without Optimism Bias they are well under 1.0.

I still wonder whether a better option might be a Park & Ride site on the outskirts of Oldmeldrum. It was a bonkers seeming scheme suggested a few years ago by Railfuture but would have the definite advantage of 2tph existing terminating services at Inverurie that could be easily extended. At only 6km with 8 major structures and a single platform station I reckon you could bring it in for more like £50-100m.

A large part of the demand at Ellon was for traffic from the north so Oldmeldrum might be able to capture some of that Banffshire demand at a lower cost.

What is the problem an Ellon reopening is trying to solve? From those figures, it looks like whatever the problem is, the answer is unlikely to be a new heavy rail line. Is it really that important for a park and ride to be on the outskirts of Ellon, rather than on the AWPR? The Balmedie-Tipperty road works mean that someone driving from Peterhead to Ellon might just want to keep driving to a more frequent P&R on the AWPR rather than waiting at Ellon for an hourly or half-hourly train. If the problem we're trying to solve is road congestion within the AWPR, then a smaller investment in a metro-style system (ranging from fancy bus lanes all the way up to a tram or heavy rail improvements) would seem to have a better business case.

 

[47271]

I agree that Ellon doesn't stack up here but NESTRANS have made sure of that by spinning the story to include the most expensive rail option versus a few roundabouts and overtaking lanes.

It's the rundown and populous towns of Peterhead and Fraserburgh that really need a railway, it would be interesting to see as much work put into that much larger proposal versus A90 dualling all the way to both towns.

I think that it'll be a long time before we see Dyce become a junction again.

 

[takno]

And that longer walk could, in itself, be a show-stopper. Also, there's the issue of who owns the lane and who would be responsible for maintaining the footpath.

Looking on google maps I'm not convinced the extra walk compared to stairs on the bridge would be especially significant, particularly in view of how high the bridges have to be. Given the build and maintenance costs of lifts, plus the significant visual impact on the area I'm really struggling to see any benefit of the bridge over using the underpass here. Obviously there could be very good reasons, but I'd want to see a detailed justification of them before I approved a planning application for that monstrous carbunkle

 

[PaulLothian]

On a slightly different but still Scottish rail-expansion theme, I have just noticed this:
https://beta.gov.scot/news/cross-border-rail-improvements-planned/

Cross-border rail improvements planned
Published: 6 Nov 2017 13:00
Major step towards three-hour journeys between Scotland and London.

The next stage in plans for reducing train journey times between Scotland and England have been announced by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

Addressing an audience of business leaders in Newcastle, the First Minister confirmed that feasibility studies were being commissioned to identify options to help improve train journey times, capacity, resilience and reliability on services between Scotland and England.

In 2016 the UK and Scottish governments jointly commissioned work to identify options for improvement, on the east and west coast rail corridors, with a focus on delivering three hour journeys between Scotland and London.

The first phase of this has now been completed. A short list of options to enhance the rail network has been identified and analysis will now be commissioned to understand cost, benefits, environmental impacts and technical considerations for work in Scotland.

The studies will focus on the east coast line south of Dunbar towards Newcastle and on the west coast line between Glasgow and Carstairs. This feasibility study will also consider the potential for new cross-border stations within the Eurocentral business park and on the existing rail network near Livingston.

The First Minister said:

“I am determined for us to take the necessary steps to secure Scotland’s future and improve our connectivity with England.

“This work will provide us with the knowledge to make informed investments in the next ten years and move us towards our goal of a three hour journey time to London and substantially reduced journey times to the cities in between.

“It is fitting that I am able to make this announcement while speaking to the North East England Chambers of Commerce. This work could have significant benefits for people and businesses on both sides of the border.

“For example, it is expected that these studies will confirm we will be able to reduce the journey time between Edinburgh and Newcastle by a third, down to only one hour, and also reduce journey times between Glasgow and Edinburgh and Carlisle. This will further enhance the opportunities for trade and leisure travel between these great cities, as well as the surrounding area.”

I haven't been able to find any details, but was interested in "This feasibility study will also consider the potential for new cross-border stations within the Eurocentral business park and on the existing rail network near Livingston." The first would require some serious rerouting of fast services onto slower and more round-about routes (whichever line near Eurocentral they use) and the second option would suggest that there is sufficient passenger demand in the southern part of the Central belt. If the new station were east of the junction with the Shotts line, that would improve rail links. It would probably also impact on Carstairs' passenger figures.

 

[Altnabreac]

On a slightly different but still Scottish rail-expansion theme, I have just noticed this:
https://beta.gov.scot/news/cross-border-rail-improvements-planned/

I haven't been able to find any details, but was interested in "This feasibility study will also consider the potential for new cross-border stations within the Eurocentral business park and on the existing rail network near Livingston." The first would require some serious rerouting of fast services onto slower and more round-about routes (whichever line near Eurocentral they use) and the second option would suggest that there is sufficient passenger demand in the southern part of the Central belt. If the new station were east of the junction with the Shotts line, that would improve rail links. It would probably also impact on Carstairs' passenger figures.

I read it as meaning they will look at new high speed rail alignments in those two corridors:
Dunbar - Newcastle
Glasgow - Carstairs

Eurocentral station would presumably be on the new Glasgow - Carstairs line.

Only the new Livingston station is described as being on the existing rail network.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

On a slightly different but still Scottish rail-expansion theme, I have just noticed this:
https://beta.gov.scot/news/cross-border-rail-improvements-planned/

The studies will focus on the east coast line south of Dunbar towards Newcastle and on the west coast line between Glasgow and Carstairs. This feasibility study will also consider the potential for new cross-border stations within the Eurocentral business park and on the existing rail network near Livingston.

So, after preliminary work, the options have been narrowed down to the only two rail lines that it could possibly have been in the first place! Nice work there I see!

I haven't been able to find any details, but was interested in "This feasibility study will also consider the potential for new cross-border stations within the Eurocentral business park and on the existing rail network near Livingston." The first would require some serious rerouting of fast services onto slower and more round-about routes (whichever line near Eurocentral they use) and the second option would suggest that there is sufficient passenger demand in the southern part of the Central belt. If the new station were east of the junction with the Shotts line, that would improve rail links. It would probably also impact on Carstairs' passenger figures.

That all sounds odd to me. Loads of expensive work to divert a rail line to stop at places that Virgin is very unlikely to want to stop at anyway (otherwise they'd be stopping at Motherwell). I can think of better priorities to be honest. Not sure how much would be done on cross-border links without the UK Government paying for quite a bit of it anyway - and this sounds like a purely Scottish Government announcement.

 

[mcmad]

Not sure that there are any new alignments planned as part of this. Think its more about squeezing the last drops of speed from the existing infrastructure. Remember than when the WCRM speed increases were happening it was only about the pendilinos so there must be a few areas where, with a little work, the overall linespeed could be increased to the benefit of TPE and others.

 

[najaB]

Not sure that there are any new alignments planned as part of this. Think its more about squeezing the last drops of speed from the existing infrastructure.

You would be hard pressed to shave 30 minutes off Edinburgh-Newcastle without some new infrastructure. A Morpeth bypass comes to mind.

 

[paul1609]

You would be hard pressed to shave 30 minutes off Edinburgh-Newcastle without some new infrastructure. A Morpeth bypass comes to mind.

You be hard pressed to shave 30 mins off Edinburgh-Newcastle full stop. According to Railmiles Mileage engine its approx 125 miles and with a current non stop time of 1 hr 23 mins. 30 mins off equals 53 mins thats a start to stop average of over 140 mph.

 

[najaB]

You be hard pressed to shave 30 mins off Edinburgh-Newcastle full stop. According to Railmiles Mileage engine its approx 125 miles...

Yet the straight line distance is around 90 miles. So there's scope (in theory at least) for new infrastructure to reduce the distance and hence time.

The c. 1 hour journey time wasn't my invention, btw, it was in the linked webpage:

For example, it is expected that these studies will confirm we will be able to reduce the journey time between Edinburgh and Newcastle by a third, down to only one hour,

 

[paul1609]

Yet the straight line distance is around 90 miles. So there's scope (in theory at least) for new infrastructure to reduce the distance and hence time.

The c. 1 hour journey time wasn't my invention, btw, it was in the linked webpage:

The straight line would imply a route through the Northumberland National Park and wouldn't serve anywhere on route. Can the Scottish Government afford a 15 mile long tunnel under the Cheviot?

 

[najaB]

The straight line would imply a route through the Northumberland National Park and wouldn't serve anywhere on route. Can the Scottish Government afford a 15 mile long tunnel under the Cheviot?

I know, hence why I said 'in theory'.

 

[paul1609]

I know, hence why I said 'in theory'.

Bah, Ill have to go back to discussing Scottish income Tax in the mess, its always a good bite

 

[BigCj34]

If I go by the Paris to Lyon average speed over 2 hours, which is on a non-stop train going at a top speed of 186mph, it averages out at 125mph. The 125 mile Edinburgh - Newcastle stretch in 60 minutes would mean an average speed of 125mph, surely only doable then with TGV speeds.

Even clearing the line for 140mph and not-stopping, cutting a third off sounds bonkers. Going by the only non-stop service at 0540 that takes 1h23, the average speed between the two cities works out at 90mph, 72% of the top-speed. Applying that same logic to a train running at 140mph, therefore an average of 100mph, could mean a reduction of journey times to 1h15.

Excuse the crude mathematics, in reality things may be a bit different! But no way is there a LGV spec line happening between Edinburgh and Newcastle.

 

[Altnabreac]

You would be hard pressed to shave 30 minutes off Edinburgh-Newcastle without some new infrastructure. A Morpeth bypass comes to mind.

Indeed. This is obviously an announcement about new line corridors.

Edinburgh - Newcastle in 60 minutes with the improvements starting south of Dunbar equals lots of new high speed line.

And equally starting at Dunbar means no Cheviot base tunnel or national park issues.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The straight line would imply a route through the Northumberland National Park and wouldn't serve anywhere on route. Can the Scottish Government afford a 15 mile long tunnel under the Cheviot?

The straight-line would go very close to Tweedbank though. Time for some line upgrades and double-tracking maybe...

OK, I'll get my coat...

 

[class26]

You would be hard pressed to shave 30 minutes off Edinburgh-Newcastle without some new infrastructure. A Morpeth bypass comes to mind.

How much time would be saved by a Morpeth bypass ? It is a drastic speed reduction to 50 mph so perhaps a 5/6 mile bypass @ the full 125 mph ?

 

[clc]

How much time would be saved by a Morpeth bypass ? It is a drastic speed reduction to 50 mph so perhaps a 5/6 mile bypass @ the full 125 mph ?

How fast will HS2 classic compatibles go?

 

[najaB]

How much time would be saved by a Morpeth bypass ? It is a drastic speed reduction to 50 mph so perhaps a 5/6 mile bypass @ the full 125 mph ?

Good question, it takes a while to slow from 110/125mph down to 50 and longer to speed back up again. Not to mention that it's incredibly wasteful.

How fast will HS2 classic compatibles go?

On existing infrastructure, no faster than current stock I would guess.

 

[JohnR]

Good question, it takes a while to slow from 110/125mph down to 50 and longer to speed back up again. Not to mention that it's incredibly wasteful.
On existing infrastructure, no faster than current stock I would guess.

Is there not the problem that potentially they will be SLOWER than Pendolinos as they will be unable to tilt?

 

[clc]

On existing infrastructure, no faster than current stock I would guess.

I meant how fast on a Morpeth Bypass and any other sections of new HS line between Dunbar and Newcastle.

 

[Altnabreac]

Is there not the problem that potentially they will be SLOWER than Pendolinos as they will be unable to tilt?

Not a problem on the East Coast Mainline...

 

[najaB]

I meant how fast on a Morpeth Bypass and any other sections of new HS line between Dunbar and Newcastle.

Governing linespeed or 225mph, whichever is lower.

 

[Altnabreac]

Governing linespeed or 225mph, whichever is lower.

Which broadly fits the hour timings mentioned here.

Edinburgh - Dunbar is around 20 minutes, a 70 mile high speed line to somewhere around Morpeth at 225 miles per hour would be around 20 minutes, 5 minutes for the classic lines north of Newcastle and 10 minutes for accelerating and braking off the high speed sections and you're looking at a journey time of just under an hour.

 

[oldman]

The 2016 HS2 report Broad options for upgraded and high speed railways to the North of England and Scotland gives a 26 minutes 27 seconds saving for a 'bypass' from north of Newcastle to near Grantshouse.

 

[NotATrainspott]

A Morpeth bypass might just be viable as an NR project of a similar scale to the Norton Bridge works. Even a 100mph limit would have a major benefit to journey times. It could tie in to general rail improvements for the North East by providing a good passing loop for express trains to overtake frequent stoppers. Even after HS2 there will still have to be express trains between Edinburgh and Newcastle, so this wouldn't necessarily be a useless intervention in the long term.

 

[takno]

The 2016 paper ummed and ahhed a lot over whether Edinburgh (and indeed Glasgow) should be connected to HS2 via the East coast or West coast arm. I thought it concluded that doing this East coast diversion was too expensive, and instead HS2 should join the imaginary Edinburgh Glasgow high speed line around Livingston. It was all a barely-costed government masterpiece in crayon anyway

 

[Altnabreac]

The 2016 paper ummed and ahhed a lot over whether Edinburgh (and indeed Glasgow) should be connected to HS2 via the East coast or West coast arm. I thought it concluded that doing this East coast diversion was too expensive, and instead HS2 should join the imaginary Edinburgh Glasgow high speed line around Livingston. It was all a barely-costed government masterpiece in crayon anyway

The 2016 paper didn't reach any conclusion on east versus west.

What seems pretty clear is that the preferred option is to go for a bit of both.

I think the location of the announcement at the NE Chamber of Commerce is significant. It shows that links to the north of England as as important as the London journey times.

 

[edwin_m]

The 2016 paper ummed and ahhed a lot over whether Edinburgh (and indeed Glasgow) should be connected to HS2 via the East coast or West coast arm. I thought it concluded that doing this East coast diversion was too expensive, and instead HS2 should join the imaginary Edinburgh Glasgow high speed line around Livingston. It was all a barely-costed government masterpiece in crayon anyway

As the author of much of it, I'm delighted to report that we had a lot of fun with the (electronic) crayons.

But I believe it did serve a purpose in giving an idea of the sort of work that would be needed to achieve 3hr journeys between London and Glasgow/Edinburgh by one route or the other. From that point of view the East Coast option does of course have the major disadvantage that journey time to Glasgow would be no faster than via HS2 and WCML, as well as other problems to do with train length and whether a fast London-Scotland service would be at the expense of stops in North East England. But as noted here it starts looking more attractive if the prime objective is facilitating shorter-distance journeys, since the ECML north of York serves a much greater population than the WCML north of Preston.

 

[takno]

As the author of much of it, I'm delighted to report that we had a lot of fun with the (electronic) crayons.

But I believe it did serve a purpose in giving an idea of the sort of work that would be needed to achieve 3hr journeys between London and Glasgow/Edinburgh by one route or the other. From that point of view the East Coast option does of course have the major disadvantage that journey time to Glasgow would be no faster than via HS2 and WCML, as well as other problems to do with train length and whether a fast London-Scotland service would be at the expense of stops in North East England. But as noted here it starts looking more attractive if the prime objective is facilitating shorter-distance journeys, since the ECML north of York serves a much greater population than the WCML north of Preston.

The report was actually rather good. I think the way everything has to be presented as real concrete action by the Scottish government even when it's just a relatively early stage report sets slightly unreasonable expectations. Even this time I'd guess all that's happened is that Sturgeon was scheduled in with the NE CoC, and somebody dug something out of the big box marked "important-sounding things I can say about Newcastle".

From the report, the East Coast route struck me as better, but then I live in Edinburgh, sometimes go to Leeds, and have no interest at all in Manchester, so it would